George G. Debono, Sliema
Myths surrounding land based wind energy
Infrastructure Minister Austin Gatt (Alternative Energy More Expensive, Friday, July 4) is reported as saying that electricity production from "alternative sources" was more expensive than that from fossil fuels.
It is presumed in the first place that by "alternative" Dr Gatt really means "renewable" energy. "Alternative" refers to non-fossil energy sources such as, for instance, biofuels or energy derived from municipal and animal waste or sewage.
Dr Gatt's assertion that electricity production from alternative (i.e. "renewable") sources is more expensive than that from fossil fuels is incorrect. Clean electricity obtained from land based wind turbines is now far cheaper than fossil fuel-derived electricity. Given good wind conditions, as in the North Sea, electricity generated by offshore wind farms built in shallow waters (less than 25 metres deep) is not necessarily more expensive than fossil fuel electricity. Though the logistics of construction and maintenance of offshore turbines are quite formidable, offshore winds tend to be stronger and usually compensate for the increased costs by producing more energy.
Dr Gatt went on to imply that "cutting edge" deep sea far-offshore wind technology is still under consideration. This is not so. This technology is still in development and therefore untested. It would be astronomically expensive until it becomes fully established over coming years or decades.
What everybody must realise is this: the cushy days when oil came cheap are over and we cannot afford to be finicky. If Malta wants to ease the impact of soaring oil prices with cheap renewable energy, then land based wind energy is the best option to go for.
Even though Malta is small, there are plenty of uninhabited and unused areas of sufficient size (slightly less than a square mile) on our exposed South West coastal areas to accommodate sizeable land-based wind farms.
It is incomprehensible that we are systematically ruining Malta with huge commercial developments which permanently destroy large areas of land and yet, when it comes to producing clean electricity from wind energy, Mepa comes over all fussy about aesthetics and visual impacts of land based wind turbines. Wind farms are admittedly very conspicuous but they are not permanent installations and, unlike offshore wind farms, they are easy to install and the disturbance of terrain for the pylon foundations is minimal. When better green technology becomes available the turbines are simply removed after their useful life of 20 - 25 years leaving barely a trace. No harm done.
The other argument is that land-based wind energy will harm our tourist industry. This is not so; that tourists are put off by the presence of wind farms is also a myth.
The other worthwhile renewable energy option for Malta is solar photovoltaic panels on our roofs; these are expensive but installation of domestic photovoltaic systems should be actively encouraged by creating attractive incentives.
The bottom line is this: If the general public cannot afford to invest in roof-top photovoltaic panels (government subsidies and refunds are, admittedly, not generous enough) and if the government is opposed to land-based wind turbines on our exposed south western flank, then we have no choice but to learn to live with expensive electricity and not grumble about it. The price of oil can only go up - that is, until it runs out altogether and we are all left in the dark because of lack of foresight.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
17 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
apgrech
Jul 12th 2008, 15:20
Rio Sammut asked: "I wonder why Mr Debono suggests the 'South West coast' for onshore windfarms! Is he not aware that the prevalent winds in Malta are North Westerly".
I think the reason is that the northerners are full of hot air and hot air is not good for the turbines :))
I.Cilia
Jul 12th 2008, 07:45
I do suggest, as I did some time ago in another article that a part of the Majjistral Park would be used to house some wind turbine projects, as well as maybe some parts of near torri l' ahmar, basically areas along the western side of Malta.
I do not personally see these wind turbines as unsightly or ones which spoil the environment. On the other hand they are a reminder that we need to care for what we have.
Joe Martinelli
Jul 12th 2008, 02:06
This is but one of many decisions the government has to take and soon.
Judging from typical reactions by readers of this article and others in this paper and other dailies, remind me of the basic principle ' For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction' - I hope I got that right.
No matter what one proposes, there is always going to be someone who makes light of the proposal. Even those who think they know something about the subject, but clearly they don't.
Myth: Only strong winds are suitable for wind turbines.
Myth: Only certain wind directions are suitable for wind turbines.
Myth: Wind turbines can be mounted on floating platforms to be towed in and out as required.
Myth: Nuclear power is environmentally friendly - how about cost, spent fuel?
Myth: Only EU countries need to reduce their carbon footprint because the EU says so.
And finally, P. Schembri who surely without him the MLP will collapse, wrote, "Don't you see that through the surcharge, the government is filling up it's coffers"? His brilliant mind should be wired to the grid and one would immediately observe the power meter at Delimara spinning backwards!
Kenneth Zammit Tabona
Jul 11th 2008, 19:52
@P Schembri regarding the government's alternative methods to build up revenue to distribute 'goodies' prior to the election once the surcharge is gone.
VERY SIMPLE SOLUTION!! TAX EMPTY PROPERTIES!
Elementary!....and far more lucrative too
KZT
D.Axisa
Jul 11th 2008, 19:38
How is it that for every project every one seems to suggest that it is done in the south and no one suggest that things are also done in the north......why not suggest l-ahrax tal-mellieha....st.andrews ridge...
Alfred Grech
Jul 11th 2008, 16:41
Thanks Dr Debono for your contribution to Maltase energy crisis.
I have suggested a few days ago that Filfla and Comino could be used for Wind Farms. Off shore turbines will be very costly since our seas are deep. If put nicely in a specific spot, the wind turbines do not necessarily look ugly at all.
Perhaps they can promote smaller ones to be installed on big buildings to look after the energy required for such a building like, plazas, Castille, etc. We lived and are still living with the old fashioned TV aerials, what's wrong with neater looking turbines?
Rio Sammut
Jul 11th 2008, 16:33
I wonder why Mr Debono suggests the 'South West coast' for onshore windfarms! Is he not aware that the prevalent winds in Malta are North Westerly??? The North West zone is certainly more favourably situated. Turbulance from the topography of the island reduces the efficiency of the turbines significantly. I suppose that he also knows that we only get strong winds (force 5 or more) on very few days in the month. On the other days the windfarms are absolutely useless.
There is a simple solution to the allocation for windfarms: build them on huge floating platforms at the Malta Drydocks, so as to be towed on to a reef and anchored there. They can easily be towed back for maintenance and repairs. After their lifetime they can also be dismantled without any harm to our delicate environment.
Rio Sammut
George debono
Jul 11th 2008, 15:11
Thank you all for your comments. Impossible to answer in
Tim Ripard
Jul 11th 2008, 14:38
Why are environmentalists only aware of 'natural' beauty? Isn't a Ferrari or a Michelangelo sculpture or a Van Gogh painting or Valletta's fortifications beautiful too? Isn't Queen's 'Bohemian Rhapsody' a beautiful song? Who says wind turbines are ugly? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are quite a few wind turbines around Vienna and they are neither ugly nor noisy.
Mr. Debono is absolutely right, as far as he goes. I would go further and add that nuclear power is another alternative.
Oil is a dirty, polluting and - as Mr. Debono points out - finite source of energy. It's price is dictated by a few speculators who grow rich on the suffering of hundreds of millions of people to a greater or lesser extent. It is high time the ground was cut from underneath of these greedy, heartless, faceless swine.
Malta is simply too small and overpopulated to try and preserve its natural beauty completely undisturbed, at great sacrifice to the majority of its inhabitants. Let's have wind farms (or atomic power) NOW and f'*k the speculators.
Derek Bennett
Jul 11th 2008, 13:57
Many years ago we used to have what was called 'alternative comedy'. I used to take this as alternative to being funny as most alternative comedians were anything but funny.
Now we have 'alternative energy'. I presume this is alternative to actuallly producing energy but using it instead. Has anyone bothered to take a look at how much energy goes into producing and installing a wind turbine and how little energy they produce on the days the wind may be blowing enough to turn the thing?
Sadly, we live in the EU which wants us to change to this method of energy production and all common sense has been blown away.
Mark Grima
Jul 11th 2008, 13:03
Austin Gatt's comments should be viewed in conjunction with Harry Vassallo's opinion piece in today's Times. Maintaining a centralised, exclusively hydrocarbon-based energy producer remains the priority of a powerful few with very strong vested interests in the status quo. As we all know, getting politicians to bend to the will of such people is child’s-play. Result = Enemalta Corporation. This is an organisation whose CEO's resign more frequently than it sends out its bills. Politicians will always fight tooth and nail to retain power (no pun intended). They would rather the earth swallowed them up then privatise or decentralise local energy production and distribution. The same goes for our national airline, national water production and everywhere else where money is concentrated in large amounts. Government’s role should be to regulate, not own national strategic assets. Unfortunately, being a regulator, as opposed to the owner, denies you access to the cash, hence the situation we have in Malta. Dr Debono's most pertinent point is often over-looked, i.e. wind turbines do not leave a scar on the landscape at the end of their useful life. The same cannot be said of our 60,000 + empty properties.
Joseph Sammut
Jul 11th 2008, 12:54
How about Kemmuna?
G.Said
Jul 11th 2008, 12:47
We could probably do around 10 of them on mount maghtab alone. Some God knows how much on Kemmuna. What about Hurd's bank ? I belive the waters are shallow there ?
Few scattered here and there around Malta and Gozo would not be an eyesore and after all, in time they can be dismantled.
You cannot call yourself and environmentalist and at the same time shoot down on shore wind farms. These are temporary structures - don't be scared of them. Once off shore farms (deep water) are fully developed and cost effective then land ones can be dismantles in favour of those.
P. Schembri
Jul 11th 2008, 12:47
Hi guys. You're forgetting one thing. And what will the government do once it's revenue decreases? Don't you see that through the surcharge, the government is filling up it's coffers so that, come election time, it will have many goodies to distribute. And how can it keeps it's promise to bring down the national debt and deficit to zero?
Antoine Cassar
Jul 11th 2008, 12:01
I am in favour in principle of wind farms, off-shore if possible. If they were to be onshore, I hope they do not choose the area of Ħaġar Qim and l-Imnajdra.... The coffin has enough nails as it is. Will the Maltese countryside ever wake up and climb out of it?
Joseph Galea
Jul 11th 2008, 11:11
Strange comment by J. Zammit, a self-confessed environmentalist. Agreed that one must learn to live with the ever-increasing price of oil. However, oil is a limited resource and will eventually disappear, albeit perhaps not in our lifetime. Meanwhile, we must as a nation seriously look into all forms of alternative, renewable energies. If land-based wind farms are proved to be a viable source of energy now - then we should not simply dismiss them out of hand simply on 'aesthetic' grounds. A well-designed wind farm with its pure technological form is much, much more aesthetically pleasing than the unmitigated disaster that the built-environment throughout Malta has become!
J Zammit
Jul 11th 2008, 10:57
Where exactly does Dr Debono suggest we set up onshore windfarms? He vaguely mentions the 'southwest coast' without elaborating. The southwest coast includes Siggiewi, Fawwara, Girgenti, Ghar Lapsi, Wied iz-Zurrieq, Qrendi, Tal-Maqluba, Zurrieq, Safi and onwards to Birzebbuga, Marsaxlokk, Gudja and the Airport.
Onshore windfarms might be all right in large and uninhabited European areas, but definitely not in Malta. Their visibility, ugliness, noise, huge initial capital outlay and interrupted supply (wind blows erratically) are no myth at all.
For the same green reasons that many oppose tower blocks, we should oppose onshore windfarms, wherever they may be suggested.
I am an environmentalist as well, I use buses and my bicycle as much as I can, and I limit my consumption of electricity to a mimimum. However genuine Dr Debono is, the only practical measure available now is what environmentalists worldwide suggest: learn to live with high oil prices and stop subsidizing fuel and electricity.
When people pay the actual price for what they use, they will use it responsibly. That will also make PV cells attractive as they will become relatively cheaper with higher electricity tariffs. Only when it becomes worthwhile to install PV cells do people do so.